Transwomen are not Women - Part 15

d4m10n said:
Fact check: Untrue.

If anyone here states a firm premise for the sake of making an argument, I'll take it at face value.

Doing a steelman remix in order to make something make sense has its place, but doing so may well lead to misinterpretation.
Click to expand...
You were correct that he was wrong in his claim as stated, and I don't fault you for your correction. But I also think it would have been wiser for you to state what you would agree with, namely that there is still a difference between civil disobedience and vandalism. This would have made it apparent that you weren't just being contrarian or defending a vandal, and probably would have made your correction go down much more easily.

Likewise, a better response from smartcookie would have been to narrow his assertion to one similar to what I posted, since his main point (that the actions of the vandal in this case were unjustified) would have remained intact even with a more limited claim.

And with that out of the way, can we all just move the ◊◊◊◊ along?
 
Cosmic Yak said:
So, sorry for bringing it up again: it's a long and busy thread, and we don't have a search function.
Click to expand...
NP, but as I said, I'm bailing from the talk. Responding below as a common courtesy, see the previous dozens of pages for the full flesh-out.
Cosmic Yak said:
However, I do wonder, if this is such old news, why you have not changed your mind in light of the evidence, and why you continue to insist that these things are not happening to any great extent in NJ, and are not increasing either.
Click to expand...
The thread is roundly in agreement that pure sex segregation is necessary in a few areas, such as prisons, competitive sports, medicine, and changing areas. The focus of debate has been on social situations where nudity etc are unlikely, so pure sex segregation may not be as necessary as you would intuitively think. Bathroom access has been the frequent battleground, and data from the UCLA Williams Institute indicates that all-gender restroom access does not present any increased level of risk. By not increased, I mean dead zero increases, statewide.

That seems counterintuitive, unless you think like an actual predator. If a guy dresses like a woman and enters a women's restroom in search of prey, what do you think happens? All eyes are on him immediately. That takes away any advantage he would gain, and some of those women might have men waiting nearby that will beat the predator into traction if a yell goes out. Or a cop could stroll by, and the predator has himself cornered in a rest room. There is no advantage gained by a predator, and that's why we don't see increased predators in open gender ID municipalities.
Cosmic Yak said:
Sorry, but I haven't noticed you saying that prisons are a different story. Could you explain why you think this? For me, the principle is the same: men claiming to be women and demanding access to women-only spaces endangers women, regardless of whether that space is a prison, a changing room or a women's health meeting.
Click to expand...
Right, but a prison is a closed community, where (in NJ) inmates cannot even have consensual sexual relations. You basically have enforced celibacy of violent criminals against their will, which is what leads to disproportionally high raping. So for the sake of safety, NJ has retreated from it's earlier self ID policy and now evaluates on a case by case basis. The door is no longer wide open, and assaults dropped back down (on male to female raping, it's back to basically zero, not counting guards accused).
Cosmic Yak said:
As for self-ID, what is your stance on that? Do you accept it, or would you like to see more stringent controls?
Click to expand...
More complicated, but Spark Notes version: I accept selfID only as accepting the claim that the dude says he's a woman, no matter how s/he presents (no objective paper bag test). I do not accept this as an all-access pass to where the women will be unclothed (changing rooms, prison showers, etc). Rest rooms, I'm still not entirely sure about. I think there is wiggle room for accommodation, but it is riddled with legitimate concerns especially from the women who would be sharing the space.
Cosmic Yak said:
Yes, my link says that transfer requests increased exponentially: that was the whole point. If you allow men to access what were and should be women-only spaces, just because they say they want to, then there is no way to exculde those who are exploiting this policy. That's why women are, in general, opposed to it- and why many men are too.
Click to expand...
That's the argument given by the anti-trans side, yes. The data shows that it is not the case. My own NJ has been gender open doors for years, and has not a single known instance of increased assaults or perving or anything in rest rooms. Massechusets, too, and every other municipality surveyed. It just doesn't happen. As I said above, I think that's because no actual advantage is gained by a predator, and they are savvy enough to know that before trying.
 
Thermal said:
That seems counterintuitive, unless you think like an actual predator. If a guy dresses like a woman and enters a women's restroom in search of prey, what do you think happens? All eyes are on him immediately. That takes away any advantage he would gain, and some of those women might have men waiting nearby that will beat the predator into traction if a yell goes out.
Click to expand...
You seem to think that predatory behavior consists only of actual sexual assault. But it doesn't. You have been given many, many examples of predatory behavior other than direct assault.
Thermal said:
More complicated, but Spark Notes version: I accept selfID only as accepting the claim that the dude says he's a woman, no matter how s/he presents (no objective paper bag test). I do not accept this as an all-access pass to where the women will be unclothed (changing rooms, prison showers, etc). Rest rooms, I'm still not entirely sure about. I think there is wiggle room for accommodation, but it is riddled with legitimate concerns especially from the women who would be sharing the space.
Click to expand...
The wiggle room I will allow is allowing a trans-identifying male into the bathroom as an exception only so long as no woman objects. If any woman objects, that male should be immediately ejected. Anything short of that policy will be taken advantage of. Hell, even that much may still be taken advantage of, but it's hard to practically implement anything stricter.
Thermal said:
My own NJ has been gender open doors for years, and has not a single known instance of increased assaults or perving or anything in rest rooms. Massechusets, too, and every other municipality surveyed. It just doesn't happen.
Click to expand...
The thing you say doesn't happen keeps happening. Since a lot of "perving" never gets reported to police, I don't know why you still think that your crime statistics prove it doesn't happen.
Thermal said:
As I said above, I think that's because no actual advantage is gained by a predator, and they are savvy enough to know that before trying.
Click to expand...
Again, that's simply not true. There is a lot of predatory behavior short of actual assault that you continue to ignore.
 
Ziggurat said:
You seem to think that predatory behavior consists only of actual sexual assault. But it doesn't. You have been given many, many examples of predatory behavior other than direct assault.

The wiggle room I will allow is allowing a trans-identifying male into the bathroom as an exception only so long as no woman objects. If any woman objects, that male should be immediately ejected. Anything short of that policy will be taken advantage of. Hell, even that much may still be taken advantage of, but it's hard to practically implement anything stricter.

The thing you say doesn't happen keeps happening. Since a lot of "perving" never gets reported to police, I don't know why you still think that your crime statistics prove it doesn't happen.

Again, that's simply not true. There is a lot of predatory behavior short of actual assault that you continue to ignore.
Click to expand...
Ya you keep repeating this, with dead zero evidence other than your own highly sexualized imagination. No more bluffing, Mr Zig. We're talking about NJ. Show the evidence of your various perving, and how they have increased with self ID, or STFU and keep your pervy fantasies on lock.
 
Thermal said:
Ya you keep repeating this, with dead zero evidence other than your own highly sexualized imagination. No more bluffing, Mr Zig. We're talking about NJ. Show the evidence of your various perving, and how they have increased with self ID, or STFU and keep your pervy fantasies on lock.
Click to expand...
I don't think you understand my claim. There are no statistics. Nobody is actually tracking this stuff. Nobody will track this stuff. That doesn't mean it isn't happening. You dismiss actual examples of it happening as cherry picking, but that doesn't mean they aren't happening.

And I'm not sure why you think that New Jersey of all places represents the whole world.
 
Ziggurat said:
I don't think you understand my claim. There are no statistics. Nobody is actually tracking this stuff. Nobody will track this stuff. That doesn't mean it isn't happening. You dismiss actual examples of it happening as cherry picking, but that doesn't mean they aren't happening.
Click to expand...
I understood your heavily flawed reasoning the first dozen times. "duuuuude, just because I can't prove there's an Illuminati doesn't mean there isn't one". Ya boring.
Ziggurat said:
And I'm not sure why you think that New Jersey of all places represents the whole world.
Click to expand...
I don't. More crippled argumentation. It happens to be the one I live in, and am familiar with, and it is the tranny bashers worst nightmare come true, aaaaaand... nothing much is going on. No tweetys. No reports. Nothing. You do know twitterers can post even unevidenced reports on twitter, right? You find any? I didn't, and I've been looking.
 
Thermal said:
It happens to be the one I live in, and am familiar with, and it is the tranny bashers worst nightmare come true, aaaaaand... nothing much is going on.
Click to expand...
Happy to talk about goings-on in New Jersey.

Right now, the NJ State Attorney General maintains that certain school district policies have "irreparably harmed transgender students by requiring parental disclosure of their gender identity without their consent." A handful of school districts have countered that they should not be legally compelled to deprive "parents of LGBTQ+ students, of information critical to the parents' ability to actively guide and foster their children's moral and psycho-social development" and that because "social transitioning constitutes psychological treatment, parents have the right to consent when the State is performing that treatment on their children."

Care to weigh in on one side or another?
 
Last edited:
Ziggurat said:
What's the count up to now?
Click to expand...
Unlike many posters ITT, I respond to direct questions. It's what normal people do.

And if you didn't love it, you wouldn't repeat your same questions, comments, and challenges to me, over and over, knowing I feel obligated to respond.
 
Thermal said:
Since I am politely bowing out of an unproductive and incredibly unhealthy discussion, no, hard pass.
Click to expand...
We've no way of knowing whether a discussion of NJ's current policy of keeping parents in the dark would be productive and healthy or not, but I thought you'd enjoy the local angle. 🤷‍♂️
 
Thermal said:
Unlike many posters ITT, I respond to direct questions. It's what normal people do.

And if you didn't love it, you wouldn't repeat your same questions, comments, and challenges to me, over and over, knowing I feel obligated to respond.
Click to expand...
You aren't actually obliged to respond. None of us are. When I ask questions, I want a response, but you get a say in this too. Seriously, do not respond if you think doing so is bad for you. It's actually OK to ignore someone's desire for a response. Try it some time. You will find that the world will not collapse.

I don't object to you responding, I don't think you have any obligation to leave, I just think it's silly to claim you're bouncing when you aren't.
 
Thermal said:
Ya you keep repeating this, with dead zero evidence other than your own highly sexualized imagination. No more bluffing, Mr Zig. We're talking about NJ. Show the evidence of your various perving, and how they have increased with self ID, or STFU and keep your pervy fantasies on lock.
Click to expand...
How about you show the evidence that there has been no increase in "perving" in rest rooms? Presumably you have a figure for "perving" before your state went "open door" and the same figure for after it went "open door". So what is that figure, and where did you get it from?

Or are you basing your position on an "absence of evidence"? In which, I believe there's a saying about that.
 
Ziggurat said:
You aren't actually obliged to respond.
Click to expand...
I am, by what are called personal standards. Some of us answer to them, even if the subject is thorny to our position.
Ziggurat said:
None of us are. When I ask questions, I want a response, but you get a say in this too. Seriously, do not respond if you think doing so is bad for you. It's actually OK to ignore someone's desire for a response. Try it some time. You will find that the world will not collapse.

I don't object to you responding, I don't think you have any obligation to leave, I just think it's silly to claim you're bouncing when you aren't.
Click to expand...
When I say imma jet on out of here, that's a clue for normies to not pose further questions. Kind of like when you have your coat on and one foot out the door, a smart host will not ask you how you feel about the tariff situation. I suppose I expect too much of posters here.
 
Matthew Best said:
Or are you basing your position on an "absence of evidence"? In which, I believe there's a saying about that.
Click to expand...
Funny how that works in both directions, innit?

The claim put forth is that it does happen, and is self evidently inevitable. I don't find any higher burden on myself to provide negative evidence, other than to point out that if it was happening, it should be observable.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom